If you watch this hoping to see a retelling of Peter Pan, you won't. I think they're trying to talk about mental illness which confuses me to begin with. The acting is not great. The only reason I gave it two stars is because of Vanessa Redgrave and Joely Richardson. Their acting was the only decent parts of the film. Adult Wendy was abysmal. Not worth watching. Don't waste your time.
58 Reviews
Was ok until adult Wendy showed up
clreviews16 July 2022
Warning: Spoilers
I expected more from trailer. Was good until adult Wendy showed up lol. I couldn't bear her. Just annoying. Acting wasn't good on her part. And someone said she also directed the movie lol. Also gave me trauma from cap hook forcing himself on Wendy with that kiss. How husband just stayed throughout all of it with her. Please don't watch it lol.
The trailer was deceiving
havesing16 August 2022
Warning: Spoilers
When i saw the trailer for this, i was kinda excited. I love louis partridge as an actor and i love the story of peter pan so naturally, because i love both i sat down and watched it. At first, i was really enjoying it, it was weird but enjoyable...and then adult wendy came on the screen. I was so disappointed with her acting i started skipping her scenes, which is basically the whole movie. Everyone else that was part of the darling girl line was actually thoroughly interesting, but adult wendy was so bad i was ready to pull a berry and jump out a window. I then came to find out the actress that played AW was also the director...it then made sense why she was casted with her bad acting skills. If all you are looking for is to see louis as peter (expecting a jeremy sumpter-espe heartthrob) you're better off watching clips on youtube of the scenes he's in (the scene with him in jane, i recommend bc it's hella cute) then watching peter pan from 2003.
Also the guy who plays hook...poor choice, especially with him weirdly forcing himself on wendy. Will never top jason isaacs's hook.
Also the guy who plays hook...poor choice, especially with him weirdly forcing himself on wendy. Will never top jason isaacs's hook.
Horrible in every single way
sarawentzel2 July 2022
I watch some really stupid stuff so calling this the worst movie I've ever seen is saying a lot. If I put something on that starts slow or has really bad acting, like this one, I will still leave it on and see if it gets better. Some do, some don't, this one just got worse. When they get to Wendy in her adult life I began to tune out. I don't know the actress but I'm not impressed. You can't seamlessly flow from one person to another as the same character when they have completely different accents. All the lines felt forced, there was zero chemistry between the actors. Had it not been for Nana I would have turned it off within 5 minutes. I'm just glad I didn't pay to rent this crap.
Adult Wendy ruins the film
tsuki57030 June 2022
Livia de Paolis is so cringely bad in this. She plays Wendy II and her acting is horrid. The actress who plays teenage Wendy and even younger Wendy were charming and so great. When the movie shifts into adult Wendy with that actress the movie completely falls off. She acts as if she is reading lines offstage in an elementary school production. It's like she is trying to give autistic vibes but neither of the previous girls did that so it's just terrible acting on her part. I could barely watch her on screen. I so wanted to like this film. It has a message regarding mental health but it gets lost behind what was stated above.
Interesting premise, abysmal execution
PropTart7724 September 2022
Warning: Spoilers
I was intrigued by the idea of this, as there can be so much to unpack from J. M> Barrie's original Peter Pan. However, this particular variant is unevenly scripted, erratically directed, and even more poorly acted--all by the same individual Livia de Paolis. What could have been a fascinating psychomachia of sexual awakening, gender expectations, mental illness, and family, falls far short of the mark.
This adaptation of Laurie Fox's novel skips a generation - it is Margaret who is Wendy II's mother rather than Jane (which in the original Barrie timeline makes sense, as Wendy was late Victorian/Edwardian; Jane was during WWII; Margaret would have been c. 1960s-70s; Wendy II: 1980s; and Berry c. 2010s). In Fox's novel, it is Wendy II grandmother Jane that goes missing, thereby bestowing the trauma of an absent mother on Margaret, who then inflicted her own traumas onto Wendy II. The removal of Margaret from de Paolis' adaptation makes the mystery and trauma both more immediate and more rushed in feeling (although this could be the result of a grossly inexperienced writer/director/actor in de Paolis), where Wendy II copes by writing letters to herself as if from her MIA mother as a child, but as an adult has borderline psychotic breaks that seem to come from nowhere.
De Paolis' accented English (presumably from Italian) immediately marks her as the cuckoo in the nest, where the younger iterations of the character have no such indicator. Furthermore, it seems that de Paolis is working from an entirely different set of motives/objectives than the rest of the cast, where adult Wendy experiences some kind of cognitive disorder that also never appears in her younger self or is explained. Furthermore, while a key aspect is the absences of Wendy II's mother Jane, this abandonment seems to impact adult Jane more than her younger self, enough so her own motherhood becomes a significant hurdle.
Iain Glen is sufficiently creepy as Hook; however, de Paolis is rather heavy handed when exploring Wendy II's sexual awakening from innocence to knowing, where the ostensible 13 year old Wendy is sexually assaulted by Hook, making the entire encounter uncomfortable. This, on top of Wendy II already being somewhat sexually precocious at 13 (as evidenced by her "happy thoughts poem" about being in bed with Peter) makes her entirely unbelievable as an adolescent to begin with. Furthermore, as the boy who never grew up, Louis Partridge's pan is absolutely grown, so instead of the impish Pan, we are left with a bizarrely aware man-child who would be more appropriate to being a College first year student rather than the embodiment of childhood at war with Hooks representation of adulthood.
In the end, this comes off as nothing more than a poor excuse for a vanity project for de Paolis. I can only wonder whether the source material is equally as weak as this film adaptation.
This adaptation of Laurie Fox's novel skips a generation - it is Margaret who is Wendy II's mother rather than Jane (which in the original Barrie timeline makes sense, as Wendy was late Victorian/Edwardian; Jane was during WWII; Margaret would have been c. 1960s-70s; Wendy II: 1980s; and Berry c. 2010s). In Fox's novel, it is Wendy II grandmother Jane that goes missing, thereby bestowing the trauma of an absent mother on Margaret, who then inflicted her own traumas onto Wendy II. The removal of Margaret from de Paolis' adaptation makes the mystery and trauma both more immediate and more rushed in feeling (although this could be the result of a grossly inexperienced writer/director/actor in de Paolis), where Wendy II copes by writing letters to herself as if from her MIA mother as a child, but as an adult has borderline psychotic breaks that seem to come from nowhere.
De Paolis' accented English (presumably from Italian) immediately marks her as the cuckoo in the nest, where the younger iterations of the character have no such indicator. Furthermore, it seems that de Paolis is working from an entirely different set of motives/objectives than the rest of the cast, where adult Wendy experiences some kind of cognitive disorder that also never appears in her younger self or is explained. Furthermore, while a key aspect is the absences of Wendy II's mother Jane, this abandonment seems to impact adult Jane more than her younger self, enough so her own motherhood becomes a significant hurdle.
Iain Glen is sufficiently creepy as Hook; however, de Paolis is rather heavy handed when exploring Wendy II's sexual awakening from innocence to knowing, where the ostensible 13 year old Wendy is sexually assaulted by Hook, making the entire encounter uncomfortable. This, on top of Wendy II already being somewhat sexually precocious at 13 (as evidenced by her "happy thoughts poem" about being in bed with Peter) makes her entirely unbelievable as an adolescent to begin with. Furthermore, as the boy who never grew up, Louis Partridge's pan is absolutely grown, so instead of the impish Pan, we are left with a bizarrely aware man-child who would be more appropriate to being a College first year student rather than the embodiment of childhood at war with Hooks representation of adulthood.
In the end, this comes off as nothing more than a poor excuse for a vanity project for de Paolis. I can only wonder whether the source material is equally as weak as this film adaptation.
Read this before watching
tammy-1732328 June 2022
Why did I rent this from Amazon? Why didn't I read the reviews? Worst movie ever. Slow. Made no sense. Worst acting I've ever seen. Please / save your money and your time.
I joked to my daughter - someone related to Wendy must have funded this movie and allowed that actress to be in it. Researched and read that the main actress/Wendy (whose poor acting ruined the movie) - was the director and writer!!! It all makes sense now 😂
I joked to my daughter - someone related to Wendy must have funded this movie and allowed that actress to be in it. Researched and read that the main actress/Wendy (whose poor acting ruined the movie) - was the director and writer!!! It all makes sense now 😂
Could have killed time a million other ways
esauseda19 June 2022
Man this movie is trash. The actress that plays Wendy reminds me of that Tommy Wiseau guy.
Its such a waste of time. I keep thinking its gonna get better but it hasn't. I only have 20 or 30 mins left so hopefully everyone dies. Fingers crossed 🤞
Its such a waste of time. I keep thinking its gonna get better but it hasn't. I only have 20 or 30 mins left so hopefully everyone dies. Fingers crossed 🤞
Main actress is unwatchable
kentsterne12 July 2022
I would have bet my life the main "actress" was autistic with a moderste speech impediment. At first, I felt like she was so brave facing her "limitations" on screen, then I realized she just sucked as an actor. She is horrid, truly. I have seen better acting at elementary school plays, and I AM NOT KIDDING.
What did I try to watch? Awful
havecompassion18 June 2022
sooooo AWFUL...I LOVED it. The Room 2.0
LastWeeksSocks24 September 2022
Warning: Spoilers
TLDR: Very possibly the worst movie I've ever seen. BUT if you have some free time to partake in some adult beverages and enjoy laughing at things that weren't really intended to be funny with friends, give this a go. If you want a movie that is ACTUALLY good....keep browsing, these are not the droids you're looking for.
To start, there are some high ranking reviews out there saying people are "missing the beauty/nuance"....they aren't. This movie is genuinely as bad as everyone says.
Why it's AWFUL: -THE MAIN ACTRESS (Main Wendy). Oof. When watching this, I was convinced that there must have been some sort of nepotism with this casting. Turns out the actress is the writer...director...and lead...explains "the Room" vibes. I'm not sure if it was hubris or if this she had to fill in for another actress who left or what, all I know for sure is she did not do well in this role. It was unfortunate as some of the supporting cast actually put in solid efforts.
-Special effects. The typical whimsy and beautiful cinematography of Neverland associated films was just totally lacking. Set design was dull and flat. Flight was laughable (see more below). I've seen better production value from high school film jobs.
-Plot. Entire plot and script was just so lackluster. There was no clear direction. No connection established between the audience and the cast. Just a confusing mess.
-Makeup. I've never paid so much attention to makeup in my life. Since this film hops timelines so much, it seems vital to clearly age/de-age characters with makeup. The character they seemed to attempt this with (aside from actually switching actors) is the father. Everyone else just looks the same.....for 20 year+ spans in timelines. 21 year old Wendy looks the the same as 45 year old Wendy.
-Timeline consistency. As mentioned above, there is about tons of jumping between timelines. The actual set design and props very so drastically from the era that you think they should be in. This makes it even more difficult to really feel like you are in a different time in the characters' lives.
Why I LOVED it: -Watch with friends. We watched with a group of friends and had a ball laughing at all of the issues listed above and below. Here are some specific details we found joy in: *Main Wendy's accent. There are 3 different instances of Wendy throughout the years. Young Wendys have no accent have no accent, main Wendy has some awful nondescript accent (actress is Italian. I'm not sure if she was going for British accent or American accent here so....either was a fail).
*Flight special effects. Flying characters have VERY visible harnesses to go with super clumsy mechanics. In flight fairy dust was visualized by an actual strobe light (not CGI). And the only "fly through the clouds scene" looked like it came from the Neverending Story....so 40+ years ago.
*Set design. Mentioned a bit above. The poster looks is really misleading as the pirate ship looks quite good. In the movie it is like...a red trash barge they rented out for $75/day.
*Prop choice. Typically technology and background design make it easier to distinguish what era you are in. Just wild inconsistencies of technology and background design (using laptops when they shouldn't be around then cars from the 80s when it should be current era). Just made everything that much worse. The "wonder" of Neverland is legit just a field of lilacs....which, while somewhat pretty, is not whimsical whatsoever.
-Everything listed in why it's awful. Especially the sheer awfulness of the main actress' acting made this so easy to laugh at.
To start, there are some high ranking reviews out there saying people are "missing the beauty/nuance"....they aren't. This movie is genuinely as bad as everyone says.
Why it's AWFUL: -THE MAIN ACTRESS (Main Wendy). Oof. When watching this, I was convinced that there must have been some sort of nepotism with this casting. Turns out the actress is the writer...director...and lead...explains "the Room" vibes. I'm not sure if it was hubris or if this she had to fill in for another actress who left or what, all I know for sure is she did not do well in this role. It was unfortunate as some of the supporting cast actually put in solid efforts.
-Special effects. The typical whimsy and beautiful cinematography of Neverland associated films was just totally lacking. Set design was dull and flat. Flight was laughable (see more below). I've seen better production value from high school film jobs.
-Plot. Entire plot and script was just so lackluster. There was no clear direction. No connection established between the audience and the cast. Just a confusing mess.
-Makeup. I've never paid so much attention to makeup in my life. Since this film hops timelines so much, it seems vital to clearly age/de-age characters with makeup. The character they seemed to attempt this with (aside from actually switching actors) is the father. Everyone else just looks the same.....for 20 year+ spans in timelines. 21 year old Wendy looks the the same as 45 year old Wendy.
-Timeline consistency. As mentioned above, there is about tons of jumping between timelines. The actual set design and props very so drastically from the era that you think they should be in. This makes it even more difficult to really feel like you are in a different time in the characters' lives.
Why I LOVED it: -Watch with friends. We watched with a group of friends and had a ball laughing at all of the issues listed above and below. Here are some specific details we found joy in: *Main Wendy's accent. There are 3 different instances of Wendy throughout the years. Young Wendys have no accent have no accent, main Wendy has some awful nondescript accent (actress is Italian. I'm not sure if she was going for British accent or American accent here so....either was a fail).
*Flight special effects. Flying characters have VERY visible harnesses to go with super clumsy mechanics. In flight fairy dust was visualized by an actual strobe light (not CGI). And the only "fly through the clouds scene" looked like it came from the Neverending Story....so 40+ years ago.
*Set design. Mentioned a bit above. The poster looks is really misleading as the pirate ship looks quite good. In the movie it is like...a red trash barge they rented out for $75/day.
*Prop choice. Typically technology and background design make it easier to distinguish what era you are in. Just wild inconsistencies of technology and background design (using laptops when they shouldn't be around then cars from the 80s when it should be current era). Just made everything that much worse. The "wonder" of Neverland is legit just a field of lilacs....which, while somewhat pretty, is not whimsical whatsoever.
-Everything listed in why it's awful. Especially the sheer awfulness of the main actress' acting made this so easy to laugh at.
Be Careful of Doing All Things
bob-2555125 June 2022
Warning: Spoilers
The Lost Girls enchanting book was blemished by Livia De Paolis' attempt to be all things: Director, Producer, Writer, and Actor of the film. But, De Paolis' decision to cast herself as the Lead Character in the film was unfortunate. The timeless adage about "not being your own lawyer" applied here. It was distracting when Livia appeared as adult Wendy. She didn't have similar facial structure as teenage Wendy; or acting skills equal to the impressive performances by Vanessa Redgrave, Joely Richardson, Iain Glen, and others (which were delightful).
I've seen better acting in elementary school plays.
alb-6675129 September 2022
Ok. I've always enjoyed the story of Peter Pan
But this was a MESS!
I was so damn excited to watch this I waited for my husband to go to work and my daughter to take a nap. I had popcorn and my favorite snacks I was so ready.
First of all the title cover is so misleading it's ridiculous.
The main actress acting was the worst I've ever seen. It was as though she was reading her lines as the movie went on plus her accent kept changing, which made her more dreadful. The plot makes ZERO sense. There was no chemistry at all between characters. I could go on and on and on about what a dissapointment this movie is.
The people behind this film should be ashamed of themselves.
Just glad the credits are finally rolling.
But this was a MESS!
I was so damn excited to watch this I waited for my husband to go to work and my daughter to take a nap. I had popcorn and my favorite snacks I was so ready.
First of all the title cover is so misleading it's ridiculous.
The main actress acting was the worst I've ever seen. It was as though she was reading her lines as the movie went on plus her accent kept changing, which made her more dreadful. The plot makes ZERO sense. There was no chemistry at all between characters. I could go on and on and on about what a dissapointment this movie is.
The people behind this film should be ashamed of themselves.
Just glad the credits are finally rolling.
Lost
ari-sophia20 June 2022
I see that this movie was trying to use the Peter Pan & Wendy story to try and tell a deeper one of motherhood and family, but it still fails epically.
The acting, for one, is abysmal. Whoever wrote the script must have written in in a different language and then sent it through google translate. The worst part of this movie is the main actress Livia de Paolis who plays Wendy. Her accent is SO distracting! Is it American, British? The way she says every other line is different and makes it seems so fake.
There are several "touching" moments that are supposed to happen throughout but they never really set you up to care that much about the characters themselves. They have NO foundation. AT ALL. The plot is a fail.
The acting, for one, is abysmal. Whoever wrote the script must have written in in a different language and then sent it through google translate. The worst part of this movie is the main actress Livia de Paolis who plays Wendy. Her accent is SO distracting! Is it American, British? The way she says every other line is different and makes it seems so fake.
There are several "touching" moments that are supposed to happen throughout but they never really set you up to care that much about the characters themselves. They have NO foundation. AT ALL. The plot is a fail.
Trust me, it gets worse as it goes.
joeyg-149-994442 October 2022
Warning: Spoilers
You know the saying the book is always better than the movie? Well, I have never read the book but even if the book is bad, it would still be 1000% better than this. Reading some of the other reviews, this is a tale of mental illness over fantasy. If that's the case, it was lost in poor script, worse acting and horrendous direction. By the way...the lead (adult Wendy) who was by far the worst actor in this dumpster fire, was also the writer and director. So yeah. Casting was terrible not only because of the acting, the three people who played Wendy, looked nothing alike. At least the child and teenage Wendy had a decent British accent. Not to mention that the same 19 year old girl played Wendy from 13-17 and looked 19. And the same 40ish year old woman played adult Wendy from early 20s to 40s and looked 50 all the way through. Peter was also an obvious 19 year old, so I guess he does grow up? Captain Hook was there to...sorta. In a three piece suit and an obvious stage prop for a hook. And he kidnaps and tried to force himself onto 13 year old Wendy. Also, it's long, overly drawn out and fails to tell a cohesive story. Don't bother with this.
Lifetime Pan fan, couldn't do it...
tourstoyou-9550025 September 2022
Warning: Spoilers
I'm pretty open minded but there were just so many inconsistencies in the story vs casting. A 13 yr old Wendy who looks at least 16-17, with an American accent who turns into a 35 yr old "collage freshman".. with an italian accent? A Pan who looks at least 17 yrs old. Dialog wasn't well written and acting left a lot to be desired... I couldn't get into it at all and gave up after about 30 minutes. The idea of the story is a good one but I feel it required a lot further development before production. They should have cast younger, more age appropriate actors... and definately should have taken accents into account. It was just too all over the place for me. They even managed to get the "kiss" wrong. Its supposed to be a thimble, not an accorn. A big let down all around.
Skip this garbage
bridgetamelia29 September 2022
Oh my goodness. Horrible writing, awful acting and not chemistry between characters. The accents are all over the place which kills any sense of continuity.
High schoolers act better than these professionals. Thank God this was on Hulu and not something I rented.
Peter Pan with Mary Martin was my favorite as a kid and I watched it everyday. Finding Neverland was amazing. Hook made me laugh and cry (Rufio and Pan the Man). Disney's cartoon is forever emblazed in my mind. All this movie did was make me want to poke out my eyeballs and destroy my eardrums with an air horn. I cannot describe in words how disappointing this movie was. A waste of time I will never get back.
High schoolers act better than these professionals. Thank God this was on Hulu and not something I rented.
Peter Pan with Mary Martin was my favorite as a kid and I watched it everyday. Finding Neverland was amazing. Hook made me laugh and cry (Rufio and Pan the Man). Disney's cartoon is forever emblazed in my mind. All this movie did was make me want to poke out my eyeballs and destroy my eardrums with an air horn. I cannot describe in words how disappointing this movie was. A waste of time I will never get back.
No, Just No
elizashtray25 June 2022
Vanessa Redgrave is the reason I thought this may be worth watching, but I was so wrong. She, along with Joely Richardson, is too good for the likes of this disappointment. Regardless of the underlying questions pertaining to mental illness, this movie could have been made a million times over, a million times better. Coming from a family with a history of mental illness, this is an insult to so many who have suffered! Have some respect, seriously. Do not watch this trash.... You will wish you had not, especially when there are so many other films that are worth the time.
LOST is certainly this movies title
toorn-14 September 2022
Lost is certainly the title of the movie. Lost storyline, lost acting - just an awful movie. I love the Pan story and thought this movie would show how Peter's actions affected the humans that he interacted with - how disappointing was I. So many good actors in this movie (Vanessa Redgrave, Iain Glen and Joely Richardson) just couldn't save it. Oh and Livia De Paolis who played Wendy was just woeful. This movie had all the potential to be a really good movie but wasted it on long boring scenes and bad acting (by Livia De Paolis) I just realized that DE PAOLIS wrote and directed this movie - now I understand why it all went wrong. Please do yourself a favour and watch anything else.
Not worth anyone's time
ciubelinus18 June 2022
It is incredible that some people are proud of participating in a movie like this.
Next time you get a great idea and want to make another movie, gather your friends and employees, ask them what they think or suggest and do the opposite, because they will be too afraid to tell you the truth, that it is probably trash.
Next time you get a great idea and want to make another movie, gather your friends and employees, ask them what they think or suggest and do the opposite, because they will be too afraid to tell you the truth, that it is probably trash.
Must see this film as a psychological exploration of rejection and trauma
alise-greene19 June 2022
I think the negative reviewers came to this screening with unfair expectations. It's not a perfect film, but I came to it with an open mind, and, because of this, I was able to enjoy the story unfold.
For all the naysayers, this film was likely produced during Covid lock-down, which, we can all imagine, made production a nightmare.
There are some solid performances. I'm not a fan of directors acting in their own films (Spike Lee was abysmal in Malcolm X) ... Flaws aside, I am glad I saw the film in a theater.
This film may not be for everyone, but for those who can roll with the story as it unfolds, there are genuine and resonant emotions explored here, and I was left in a place of deep reflection after viewing.
For all the naysayers, this film was likely produced during Covid lock-down, which, we can all imagine, made production a nightmare.
There are some solid performances. I'm not a fan of directors acting in their own films (Spike Lee was abysmal in Malcolm X) ... Flaws aside, I am glad I saw the film in a theater.
This film may not be for everyone, but for those who can roll with the story as it unfolds, there are genuine and resonant emotions explored here, and I was left in a place of deep reflection after viewing.
Really Rather Charming
PutuNix19 June 2022
Those slamming this movie totally missed the nuances of what is actually a rather charming exploration of the balance between fantasy, realty and mental illness.
Is Peter real? Of course, to these women. Does the idea of him destroy and enhance their lives, yes. Is the movie well-made and acted? Yes, very much so. Are the characters compelling, believable and sympathetic? Yes, yes and yes.
I watched this because I like three of the actors and was intrigued that they might possibly have contributed to a film which was so awful the user reviews all slammed it. I was intrigued and then entertained and finally satisfied.
I did enjoy this movie and I can only guess that those who slammed it were expecting crocodiles and ticking alarm clocks, pirate battles and peter flying around and swinging his sword. What we got was mush deeper and more moving than that; and yes, I was moved.
For anyone with a sensitive and intelligent outlook, this is absolutely worth the watch.
Is Peter real? Of course, to these women. Does the idea of him destroy and enhance their lives, yes. Is the movie well-made and acted? Yes, very much so. Are the characters compelling, believable and sympathetic? Yes, yes and yes.
I watched this because I like three of the actors and was intrigued that they might possibly have contributed to a film which was so awful the user reviews all slammed it. I was intrigued and then entertained and finally satisfied.
I did enjoy this movie and I can only guess that those who slammed it were expecting crocodiles and ticking alarm clocks, pirate battles and peter flying around and swinging his sword. What we got was mush deeper and more moving than that; and yes, I was moved.
For anyone with a sensitive and intelligent outlook, this is absolutely worth the watch.
zzzzzzzz
jamiebissell-368-80118620 June 2022
I had to go through password reset twice, two factor authentication twice; and password reset to be able to rate this excuse of a movie. A waste of my time, which could have been spent better boarding out my mother-in-laws attic, which I would rather do than watch this drivel again.
I Wanted to Like This
theladyemeline4 October 2022
I really did. The premise seemed solid and the artwork appealing. Vanessa Redgrave and Joley Richardson should be paid damages for having to list this on their resumes. I don't think even Emma Thompson could've salvaged it if she'd gone through with it. Livia's directing was only slightly better than her acting and both made "Llamageddon" look like an Oscar contender. The wig on the youngest Wendy was absolutely awful. The jumps between certain scenes didn't flow at all. The interaction between most of the actors just wasn't believable.
I tried to like it. I forced myself to finish for the sake of the people I assume worked really hard to try and make something of it other than a showcase of Livia de Paolis' "talents". Don't make the same mistake. Unless you just really hate yourself.
I tried to like it. I forced myself to finish for the sake of the people I assume worked really hard to try and make something of it other than a showcase of Livia de Paolis' "talents". Don't make the same mistake. Unless you just really hate yourself.
Terrible
eprice32 October 2022
I have NEVER written a review on here before but felt compelled to let everyone know that it's a shame that the worst actress in this movie is also the writer and director. So much promise in the beginning and then it instantly went downhill into an abyss. Thank goodness the teenage Wendy has redeemed herself in House of the Dragon. Didn't make sense after adult Wendy came on and her dialogue was absolutely ridiculous. Her timing and responses were so odd! I kept watching it hoping it would somehow get better, but nope, just worse. I'm so shocked that Vanessa Redgrave agreed to do this movie at all.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
